English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

The cone calorimeter (ASTM E1354/ISO 5660) has been suggested as a replacement or alternate for ASTMI E136lISO 1182 in classifying the combustibility of materials. While the cone offers several advantages over the existing test, this paper identifies two potentially serious shortcoming as well: (1)the sensitivity of measured values to sample thickness and orientation, and (2) poor reproducibility at low levels of heat release which characterize noncombustibility. The first of these difficulties makes the results dependent on the scenario in which the material is to be employed; the second issue makes it difficult to obtain reliable measurements for combustibility classification. It is proposed instead that combustibility be classified on the basis of bomb calorimetry, ASTM D2015lISO 1716. Like the cone, bomb calorimetry provides a continuous scale of combustibility, but it is also scenario-independent, more reproducible and gives rise to combustibility classifications which are directly relatable to those in current use.

Issues Associated With Combustibility Classification: Alternate Test Concepts